Today marks the first full week of the encampment at the farm. News of the fight to save the farm went international this week. Tree sitters: Julia Butterfly Hill, John Quigley, Daryl Hannah and Joan Baez still occupy the large old walnut tree on the farm. It has been learned that in addition to her tree sit, Julia has been fasting for the past 14 days. She reportedly is only drinking an infusion of herbs grown on the farm. The farm has been surveyed by botanists who believe it has the largest collection of Mezo-American medicinal herbs outside of Central America.

In this last week the encampment has tripled in size. The tent city surrounding the farm has grown to 32 tents at last count, each with 2 to 3 campers, while others sleep in the open air. The full time population of the farm is now estimated to be over 100, with numbers approaching 300 to 400 at nightly vigils and concerts. More continue to arrive has word spreads.

Life on the farm has settled into a daily routine of morning press conferences, afternoon affinity group meetings and training sessions. Vigils are held every evening at 7:00 and followed by concerts into the night. Late nights and early mornings have shifts of people on watch should there be a surprise raid by authorities.

Free organic food, much of it grown on the farm, is served throughout the day. The outpouring of support has been amazing. Supporters continue to come and donate supplies. Local TV news crews from both English and Spanish stations line 41st Street.

Sheriff presence has been light. There have been sheriff helicopter flyovers everyday, these are now thought to for surveillance and no longer spook the campers as they first did. No signs of preparations for a raid have been seen in the surrounding area.

The farm has become a focal point for much of Los Angeles’ local environmental activist community as well as the local music scene. Big names have made surprise appearances and the nightly concerts give the encampment the feeling of an outdoor music festival. The K-Town Critical Mass ride changed its normal route to visit the farm last Friday. The Los Angeles Green Party has committed many of its key members to the cause. The National Lawyers Guild has observers there. And the list of local grassroots groups expressing solidarity with the farmers is growing.

Political pressure to save the farm continues to grow as more people come out in support of the farmers. Congresswoman Maxine Waters is scheduled to appear at tomorrows press conference.
The developer Ralph Horowitz continues to be the main obstacle in the fight to save the farm. There are reports that Horowitz has upped the asking price for the land from 16.5 million to 20 million. This move is seen by some has holding the farmers hostage to get a higher price. Some are questioning if fundraising is the best way to save the farm and that pushing for the city to use eminent domain again might be the best way to secure the future of the farm.

Regardless of the maneuverings by Horowitz for more money it seems that on the political side the farmers have found leverage by holding their ground and standing firm in their vow to resist forced eviction. The worldwide media attention and the political fault lines drawn by the issue have put the mayor’s office and the city council in a position where the fate of the farm and their own political standing are now intertwined.

Caller from the farm reports increased sheriff activity around in the farm.

Low flying sheriff helicopters circled the farm this morning for 30 minutes. They are presumed to be doing aerial surveillance. Also un-uniformed police in unmarked cars have been seen near the gate taking photographs.

No indication if this is routine advance work for Congresswomen Maxine Waters who is scheduled for a 2:00 pm press conference or a prelude to a raid.

Tonight at 7 p.m., at the South Central Farm Vigil a prominent Indian leader from the Dakota nation Floyd Red Corn lead the march around the farm.

At 7 a.m. on Thursday June 1, Danny Glover is expected to come to the farm.

Every day, at 7 p.m., over 200 people show up at the vigil. On the weekend over 300 showed up.

Here is a photo of the need board at the farm

previous poster may be refering to
Floyd "Red Crow" Westerman, Actorvist

I need some help. This land is being used for several private gardens. Therefore, we cannot use the land because it is essentially private. What are we fighting for then? Aren't we fighting so that these select gardeners can have private gardens? How do we justify this?

Corporate personhood adds 2 developer's clout;

The current debate over the future of the vibrant SouthCentral community farm appears to be between the campesino tenant farmers and a wealthy real estate developer named Ralph Horowitz. However, Horowitz is not acting as an individual private property owner in this case. In reality, Horowitz's claim of property ownership is bolstered by the support of two powerful investment corporations that he is partnered in. Horowitz is a partner and shareholder in both the Alameda-Barbara Investment Corporation and the currently named Libaw-Horowitz Investment Company..

The Alameda-Barbara Investment Corporation (ABIC) initially sold the land for 4.7 million in 1986 to the City of LA for the purpose of building an incinerator. The community rejected the proposed incinerator and the land lay dormant while ABIC and the city negotiated a price for resale. The city later transferred the land from Public Works to the LA Harbor Dept. for 13.3 million exchange. During this time the non-profit LA Regional Food Bank was given a permit by the LA Harbor Dept. to use the land for a community farm. The Harbor Dept. then resold the land to Horowitz's renamed Libaw-Horowitz Investment Company (LHIC) for just over 5.2 million in 1996..

"1995
By this time, Horowitz’ interest in the property is rekindled, and negotiations begin for ABIC – now the Libaw-Horowitz Investment Company, or LHIC – to buy the property back from the City."

Following a 2002 lawsuit from LHIC, in closed session the city agreed to drop the price to 4.5 million, lower than the initial price of 4.7 million sold in 1986. Without taking inflation into consideration, LHIC already scored 0.2 million on this deal. Include over ten years of inflation and the economic gain by LHIC is multiplied. The public taxpayers were not informed of any of the city's real estate transactions with LHIC..

"2002
The eventually-approved settlement includes (1) dismissal of the LHIC suit, (2) sale of the property to LHIC for $4.5 million, and (3) LHIC’s donation of 2.7 acres to the City for park and recreation purposes."

Timeline of SouthCentral farm @;
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/032206_war_past.shtml

also;

History of the farm
http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/3028

Today in 2006 Horowitz's LHIC is asking the tenant formers for 16.3 million for the same land LHIC bought for 4.5 million in 2002. Clearly having an investment corporation's legal team available granted the same rights as human beings benefitted in LHIC's aquisition of the farmland for below market value in 2002, and their current legal support in demanding an above market price of 16.3 million from campesino farmers. Without the illegal modification of the US Bill of Rights that grants non-living corporate entities equal rights with human beings this situation at the SouthCentral farm would not be happening.

The lawsuit on behalf of the SouthCentral farmers is valid because a) the public was closed out of any and all decisions the City of LA made with ABIC/LHIC about transfer/sale of farmland b) the real estate transactions between City of LA and ABIC/LHIC involved the spending of public tax dollars c) NO taxation without REPRESENTATION!!

Voters throughout LA would most likely prefer a community farm over another warehouse and show their preference in the ballot box. However, the public comment period at city hall meetings are considered advice and not binding votes. Corporations like LHIC are certain to oppose any ballot measures or referendums to city council decisions because corporations usually lose against overwhelming public opinions that favor ecological sustainability and human rights above developer's profits. Thus corporate personhood prevents public votes from being expressed by granting corporation's greater rights only given to human beings..

"corporate lawyers (acting as both attorneys and judges) subverted our Bill of Rights in the late 1800's by establishing the doctrine of "corporate personhood" -- the claim that corporations were intended to fully enjoy the legal status and protections created for human beings."

more on problems with corporate personhood @;
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/

also;

"But throughout the 1800s, especially after the Civil War, "[u]nder pressure from industrialists and bankers, a handful of 19th century judges gave corporations more rights in property than human beings enjoyed in their persons."

The biggest blow to citizen constitutional authority came in 1886. The US Supreme Court ruled in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad, that a private corporation was a "natural person" under the US Constitution, sheltered by the 14th Amendment [(even though that amendment had been written and ratified in 1868 to protect the rights of freed slaves) [3]] , which requires due process in the criminal prosecution of "persons." Following this ruling, huge, wealthy corporations were allowed to compete on "equal terms" with neighborhood businesses and individuals. "There was no history, logic or reason given to support that view," Supreme Court Justice William 0. Douglas wrote 60 years later. [4]

Once corporations were legally defined as "natural persons", they automatically were endowed with the same "Bill of Rights" as human beings, and so came to possess and then exploit with devastating consequences, the same "rights" of the freedom of speech, and the ability to participate in elections and lobby elected officials."

more on how to end corporate dominance @;
http://www.ratical.org/corporations/

To discuss the living soil ecosystem as if it were non-living property is itself repulsive to me. As people remove the borders and barriers between cultures and ecosystems we can allow natural ecosystems to flourish everywhere without concerns of defined boundaries and ownership. Community farm implies sharing and togetherness, that everyone reaps what the farmers sow and tend. In this oasis surrounded by non-living warehouses and oceans of petroleum based pavement, the human heart remains free and untethered, able to soar above the walls of corporate rules and into the life giving rain clouds above..

Clearly soil as a living ecosystem is more of a community than the non-living corporate entities ever will be..

"The soil is an ecosystem in which thousands of living creatures live and interact. There can be more organisms in a teaspoonful of good quality soil than there are people in the entire planet earth, i.e. more than 6 billion, a truly amazing fact."

more on soil ecology @;
http://www.soil-net.com/dev/page.cfm?pageid=ks4_intro_livingbeing

We desire a world without borders, corporations, police repression and property ownership. We desire a world where people return to healthy, loving and democratic communities not detached from the ecosystem that surrounds us. SouthCentral community farm is a model example of an intact ecosystem, an oasis of our desires surrounded by non-living warehouses and pavement. We intend and will act to fulfill our desires & manifest into reality..

written by;

dragonflies

Thanks for the information on the land. However, I am still under the impression that it is going to remain private and I will not be able to have a garden. It is my understanding that all the plots are full. Therefore, nobody else can get a plot. Is there going to be a lottery system for garden plots? Is the time that one may use a plot going to be limited? If not, how does the public benefit from these actions?

you may desire a world without borders and the elimination of property rights but that does not tranlate into EVERYONE desiring the same goal. What about the little guy or gal who saves up enough to buy a home and a little parcel of land, doesnt he deserve the right to the fruit of his or he rlabours?

Also, in the case of the SCF why hasnt anyone asked themselves why there are no mention of blacks getting access to the lots. Remember this is south central, where at the time of the creation of the farm, the community was largely black.

Anon has a point. If these gardners get their way, they will own their garden plots. The real owner will have nothing. In addition, you protesters will have nothing. You will have the same rights to the land as anyone else, including the rightful owner. So why are you continuing?

come on down to this oasis...the farmers want to expand the vision of the farm to become a hybrid park- a true community center to provide resources the community currently lacks, college fairs, health workshops, outdoor learning classrooms for surrounding schools, etc. They have models and plans to do this. I recently brought my class to the garden and they learned so much from their tour and planting working. I hope it stays, so that more students in LA get the oppertunity to connect and learn about the earth.

T: "However, I am still under the impression that it is going to remain private and I will not be able to have a garden."

Is it true that all you care about is yourself? If a warehouse is built is it going to be public? Will you get a warehouse too?

Maybe the land should belong to the people that work it. And maybe in a world of ever increasing energy costs some people think that a farm is a better use for the land than a warehouse filled with cheap goods sent thousands of miles from China.

The owner would be a land trust, which isn't the same as direct ownership of private property. It's a quasi-governmental body that operates the property according to the mandate of the trust.

It's a tricky thing, because in this country, there's so little support for real public property for public use. In the US, the state, businesses, and even people are opposed to the idea of "the general welfare", despite the fact the idea is part of our founding documents. So, people of good will, concerned with public good, have to form these corporation-like entities to carry out their goals.

There should be some kind of affirmative action for the local community. Though I support the farm (including via donations) I do think they should have phased out plots for people who don't live in the vicinity, and phased in more local farmers via directed outreach. That said, the demographics have changed a lot. This is due, in great part, to the end of segregation since the 1960s.

Ultimately, public land is secured and controlled via political pressure, and mainly through voter influence is this political will be translated into political power.

Regarding private property:

People who are opposed to private property are generally very supportive of private property for living and work.

Notably, this is where communists and anarchists tend to diverge in opinion. Communists tend to view the dictatorship of the proletariat as the best way to manage the property, while anarchists tend to see local organizations as the best method.

I'll detail the anarchist ideas below. They generally like the idea that if you live in an apartment, the tenants should take it over from the landlord maybe by paying, or maybe by seizure (the revolutionary way). Some also say it's the same for work: collectivize and turn the owner into a co-worker (or kill him if he fights back, I guess).

The general idea is that the extent of your private property is limited by your ability to use it, and to live in it. They just don't like the idea that someone can own more property, and leverage that to pay you lousy wages, or extract high rents.

I think the anarchist position is influenced heavily by the suburban experience of many anarchists. Likewise the more older urban socialists in America rented from slumlords in the big cities, and had ideas of collective property more oriented toward apartment living. Hence, the vogue for public housing high-rises back in the 1950s.

So all this rubbish about private property is just irrelevant.

Blight

progress

It looks like Mr. Horowitz has forgotten HIS roots. He represents the pox of mankind. SHAME ON HIM. What a small person!

To Pete Nice: Are you insane? Wal-Mart is not better than growing your own foods.

To the one person that didn't get it: It was a joke!

More Questions?
by CK Saturday, Jun. 03, 2006 at 9:17 PM

Why were the original farmers expelled from 41st and Alameda?
Have you visited the 111th street and Avalon farm in Watts, CA?
Where is the money that was raised by Rufina Juarez and Tezozomoc (aka Esteban Torres Guzman)?
Have you seen the original map of the SCF? The map show Rufina Juarez started at SCF in 2003.
Is it true she works for MTA? (Metropolitan Transportation Authority) If so, how can she claim she is socialist?
Many have seen the original map of the SCF plots that were destroyed. It is horrible the original farmers were thrown out. It seems there is definitely a conflict the public needs to learn about before supporting 41st and Alameda garden.


Movie Stars Help The Wrong Cause
by Real Activist Sunday, Jun. 04, 2006 at 9:27 AM

Just north of 41st and Alameda in downtown Los Angeles, near the streets of San Pedro, 5th, 6th, Winston, Wall and Crocker, you will find 1000's upon 1,000's of homeless children, youth, mothers, fathers, famililes, men and women living in the streets of downtown Los Angeles' Skid Row.
The homeless people of Los Angeles need food, shelter, jobs, medical services, mental health services and people to advocate for them and their children.
The movie stars should advocate to raise 16.3 million dollars to help the homless of Los Angeles' Skid Row. Movie Stars should rally in support of the homeless epidemic downtown and not the 41st and Alameda despotic leadership (aka Rufina Juarez and Tezozomoc) that has thrown out over 300 families.
The bottom line the ritzy who live in the Downtown Lofts want the homeless people out of Skid Row. Some of these people living in the lofts work for the the movie industry. Let's get the priorites straight.


Take Off Your Mask
by Aztec Dancer Sunday, Jun. 04, 2006 at 11:42 AM

Many in the Danza World (Aztec Dancers) consider Rufina Juarez an opportunist. She is not a likeable person because she divides people.
Tezozomoc too...

They are continuing because the despotic leadership aka Rufina Juarez and Tezozomoc do NOT want the public to know they EXPELLED the original SCF farmers. Check out 111th Street and Avalon in Watts, CA to talk to the real original farmers they threw out!

Do you homework.... Research the facts... Learn who the players are... Where is the money? Why were the original farmers thrown out?

And yes, where are the Black people/farmers? They have a right to the land!

The despot leadership are from San Diego and Sun Valley; not the South Central LA.

Where is all the money the South Central Farmer Leadership has been COLLECTING?

The South Central Farmers flyers and brochures claim they are a 501C3 non profit organization. Rufina Juarez and Tezozmoc state the South Cental Farmers is a 501C3 nonprofit organization, but when one checks the California State records there is no listing. See for yourself.

http://kepler.ss.ca.gov/list.html

Where is all the money they have been collecting for the past several years?